Flat Earthers

[Fragony]

You mean like this?
https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/...ves-earth-flat

I also hope that you're saying Einstein was joking.
Unless you want to talk about what is the standard for not moving in the universe. You could define it as your brain and then every time you shake the entire universe around your head, you have proven your point.

I think he was trolling, but I don't know it was actually Einstein, but someone made a clear case. Things like this are fun no, a battle of minds much greater than ours (well mine at least). My much much much smarther brother once a tricked me into believing that 1+1 isn't in fact 2. I cheated and never told him I did and please don't tell him should you meet him because he foolishy links that I am just as smart as him, trust me I'm not. But this is all fun, and should be seen as that. So the earth is flat ok... it aren't religious nutjobs who claim it is so really so stock up on popcorn

EDIT, Just before some deranged viking pisses in my neck, I havent watched the video but know what it's about

[Husar]

I think he was trolling, but I don't know it was actually Einstein, but someone made a clear case. Things like this are fun no, a battle of minds much greater than ours (well mine at least). My much much much smarther brother once a tricked me into believing that 1+1 isn't in fact 2. I cheated and never told him I did and please don't tell him should you meet him because he foolishy links that I am just as smart as him, trust me I'm not. But this is all fun, and should be seen as that. So the earth is flat ok... it aren't religious nutjobs who claim it is so really so stock up on popcorn

EDIT, Just before some deranged viking pisses in my neck, I havent watched the video but know what it's about

When I read that page, and I just read the end, it seemed to me like the argument made no sense and the conclusion came out of nowhere.
The physics that guy uses have to be pretty weird if he can have a satellite flying above a flat earth and so on.His gravity must stop at a certain distance but then he drops things from said satellite and gravity makes them fall down.

I really can't be bothered to waste my time reading all of it though.

[Fragony]

Don't feel alone Hussie this is trolling for people who are a bit smarter than us

[Husar]

Don't feel alone Hussie this is trolling for people who are a bit smarter than us

I didn't say I can't understand it, I said it seems like hogwash although I didn't read all of it.
Physics is not all that hard to understand if someone can explain it well enough.
I don't even need to have full understanding of all the principles he uses though to suspect that he is using them wrong.

Take this for example:

Let us again venture into thought experiment: eject some pods towards the earth from one such of our imaginary satellites at regular intervals along our orbit such that they are in free fall. Again, we can assume these are straight lines extending below to a translatable location on the surface of the earth, its geolocation. We can say these lines are normal to the trajectory of the satellite and they are normal to the ground, thus making the lines parallel. Since the orbit is straight, and the orbit relates directly to the geographical locations it is above, we have come a long way to show the planet is also flat.

This is almost circular reasoning because the trajectories are only parallel if the earth is flat, yet he says their parallelism proves that the earth is flat. If he had some actual proof that the trajectories are parallel it might warrant further consideration.
I really don't have the time to get into all the details though, you can probably just read the comments for better dismissals.

[Gilrandir]

This is almost circular reasoning because the trajectories are only parallel if the earth is flat, yet he says their parallelism proves that the earth is flat. If he had some actual proof that the trajectories are parallel it might warrant further consideration.

I was taught at school that lines may seem parallel only at a discrete distance. They will eventually converge anyway.

[Seamus Fermanagh]

I was taught at school that lines may seem parallel only at a discrete distance. They will eventually converge anyway.

I'm still angry that I cannot watch something disappear into a black hole.

[Fragony]

I'm still angry that I cannot watch something disappear into a black hole.

Be glad, if you can you are probably too close to it

[Husar]

I was taught at school that lines may seem parallel only at a discrete distance. They will eventually converge anyway.

You mean like, at the end of the universe?
The theoretical definition of parallel would mean they never converge, in reality it is quite possible due to inaccuracies etc. of course.